close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

I had no clue it was this bad

Discussion in 'Michigan Whitetail Deer Hunting' started by TeamBuckshot, Dec 6, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Crawfish

    Crawfish Premium Member

    Messages:
    1,487
    Likes Received:
    535
    Location:
    A long way from home
    "Suspect" is a little misleading because it can be interpreted to mean the deer was behaving or appearing abnormally. However, DNR is using the term "Suspect" to identify those deer that tested positive using the initial screening test used by the DNR. The way it was explained to me is that it is a biochemical test with a sort of color change that indicates a positive result. Anything that is not a clear negative is sent to Iowa for confirmation. However, the person I spoke to said every positive initial test had been very obvious - no borderline results. There have not been any false initial positives yet, so it seems to be a reliable screening test. However, it is a chemical indicator test, so there is always the potential for a contaminant to create the appearance of a positive indicator, so they go to Iowa for a more exact test.

    In other words, "suspect" doesn't refer to anything outwardly suspicious about the deer. Just the test result.
     
    jiggin is livin and mbrewer like this.
  2. motdean

    motdean

    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    2,041
    Anyone that did not think it would pop into this neighborhood of positives either this year or next had to be kidding themselves.

    In the CWD Symposium (which should be available online soon), many of the states that are experiencing this saw a pretty significant climb in years 3/4.

    You know the old saying about those that can learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
     

  3. jr28schalm

    jr28schalm

    Messages:
    3,037
    Likes Received:
    2,986
    Location:
    macomb
    Is this your way of saying told you so
     
  4. Bomba

    Bomba Premium Member

    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    1,130
    Location:
    Birch Run
    He's not????
     
    jr28schalm likes this.
  5. motdean

    motdean

    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    2,041
    Not at all!

    I wasn’t even aware of what the trend looked like until I watched the CWD SYMPOSIUM, so I had nothing to “tell”.

    But my concern grew exponentially after watching it. I would be in favor of sharpshooters being hired immediately and compensating landowners that help by either shooting deer or allowing sharpshooters to do so.
     
    CHASINEYES, jr28schalm and mbrewer like this.
  6. BigW

    BigW

    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    55
    Location:
    mid-Michigan and NELP
    Just a quick comment about the math. 30/23000=0.0014 or 0.14%. In other words 1.4 deer per 1000 tested were CWD positive. In Montcalm Co., that rate shot up to 8 per 1000 deer tested.
    Two points of perspective, chances of getting a new case of cancer are 5 per 1000 US citizens, chances of being in an injury car accident are 1 in 700.
    Let's also remember that the prions keep "working" after they are in the environment. So, based on current information, we can assume the rate of 8/1000 will continue to go up (quickly) in the hot zone.
     
    hk_sl8 likes this.
  7. jr28schalm

    jr28schalm

    Messages:
    3,037
    Likes Received:
    2,986
    Location:
    macomb
    Sorry dean, I accualy know your not that kind of poster..i like reading your posts
     
    motdean likes this.
  8. mbrewer

    mbrewer

    Messages:
    2,621
    Likes Received:
    2,848
    Location:
    Halfway to almost there
    Do you feel the same about the Indiana/Illinois border counties?
     
  9. mbrewer

    mbrewer

    Messages:
    2,621
    Likes Received:
    2,848
    Location:
    Halfway to almost there
    It's not just how many but where.
     
  10. Pinefarm2015

    Pinefarm2015

    Messages:
    6,832
    Likes Received:
    5,663
    Keep in mind, there are a lot of samples yet to be tested, as they await more testing kits. So expect the numbers to jump further, along with a reasonable expectation that the plume may increase in size too.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017 at 7:52 AM
    mbrewer likes this.
  11. motdean

    motdean

    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    2,041
    If that’s your early Christmas gift, I’ll take it. :)

    I didn’t take it that way, but did want to make the point that people should watch the replay of the symposium...it isn’t an APR debate nor a baiting debate. I plan to rewatch it.

    For what it’s worth, if Steve gave out an “Earned a chuckle” award, you would be at or near the top.
     
    jr28schalm likes this.
  12. crossneyes

    crossneyes

    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    dimondale michigan
    Surf and turf for dinner tonight. Sagnasty eyes and venison. Gonna go a happy man!
     
  13. swampbuck

    swampbuck

    Messages:
    17,218
    Likes Received:
    4,976
    Location:
    Majinabeesh
    For those who say it is .001 prevalance. Maybe once the locations are public the zone will be smaller and the prevalance higher.

    For comparison there were 29 bTB positives last year. And that number is trending up.
     
  14. Thirty pointer

    Thirty pointer

    Messages:
    3,843
    Likes Received:
    3,732
    Location:
    kent county mi.
    Most think that CWD and too many deer go hand and hand .Having a CWD suspect deer shot on my property i can tell you that is not always the case .It is wooded with many smaller parcels in this area and deer can be scarce .I would have never guessed it would pop up here .Going to be hard to reduce the herd when there are few to begin with .Folks around here are really gonna be bummed when they find out .
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 7, 2017 at 8:25 AM
  15. Crawfish

    Crawfish Premium Member

    Messages:
    1,487
    Likes Received:
    535
    Location:
    A long way from home
    From DirtySteve's post, during the period 1998-2014, DNR tested 34,207 deer. There was one positive CWD deer during this period, in a captive Kent County facility.

    This hunting season they have 3 positives out of 310 deer tested so far in Kent County.

    You don't think this requires an aggressive response?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 7, 2017 at 8:25 AM
    357Maximum likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.